Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

Spengler v. Francisco, CV 18-91-DOC (SP). (2020)

Court: District Court, C.D. California Number: infdco20200121d06 Visitors: 12
Filed: Jan. 17, 2020
Latest Update: Jan. 17, 2020
Summary: ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE DAVID O. CARTER , District Judge . Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 636, the Court has reviewed the Second Amended Complaint, records on file, and the Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge. Plaintiff has not filed any written Objections to the Report within the time permitted. The Court accepts the findings and recommendation of the Magistrate Judge. IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that: (1) defendant Fr
More

ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636, the Court has reviewed the Second Amended Complaint, records on file, and the Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge. Plaintiff has not filed any written Objections to the Report within the time permitted. The Court accepts the findings and recommendation of the Magistrate Judge.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that: (1) defendant Francisco's Motion to Dismiss (docket no. 36) is denied without prejudice; (2) this case is stayed under the Younger Abstention Doctrine until the related state criminal case is no longer pending; and (3) the Court Clerk is directed to administratively close this case. Plaintiff is instructed that, if he wishes to continue with this case after disposition of the criminal charges against him, he must file a request that the stay be lifted and the case be re-opened within sixty (60) days of the final disposition of the criminal charges (including all appeals).

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer